THE VALUE OF THE HERRMANN BRAIN DOMINANCE INSTRUMENT (HBDI) IN FACILITATING EFFECTIVE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF CRIMINOLOGY

Transcription

1 THE VALUE OF THE HERRMANN BRAIN DOMINANCE INSTRUMENT (HBDI) IN FACILITATING EFFECTIVE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF CRIMINOLOGY Ann-Louis de Boer 1 Centre for Academic Development University of Pretoria Dorette van den Berg Department of Criminology University of Pretoria INTRODUCTION PARADIGM SHIFT For many decades, educational systems worldwide have focused mainly on left brain teaching and evaluation strategies. From a Curriculum 2005 perspective the historically separate worlds of work and learn are no longer acceptable and it is therefore important to look at the context of subjects as well as the changes that are being demanded by the future employers. In analysing the needs of potential employers it seems as if there is a demand for students who can think holistically, be innovative, work in teams, synthesize information, integrate environmental and societal values and ethics into their work, communicate effectively and solve problems in creative ways. These ways of thinking have been neglected in most curricula. With the emergence of a multicultural political and educational dispensation in the new South Africa a new approach which can accommodate a diversity of cultural perspectives and contexts, should be followed. The aim of multicultural education focuses in part on an approach that embraces the complex and very difficult task of helping to create a unified democratic society in which people can maintain their cultural and personal identities. Such a culture of tolerance and respect should focus on creative ways of teaching students with competing interests that their differences can form the foundation of a critical and creative civil society. According to Goodlad (1994:4) a critical part of multicultural education is the continuing education of educators. One important factor that emerges is that a paradigm shift requires a change in teachers traditional perspectives of teaching and learning. Therefore a cognitive, social and moral change with regard to themselves, their teaching practices and their students behaviour should be brought about (Heard 1999:462). EFFECTIVE TEACHING AND EFFECTIVE LEARNING It has been documented that effective learning takes place if all four thinking quadrants, as identified by Herrmann (1995: ,425), are involved in learning. Lumsdaine and Lumsdaine (1995:97) describe these four different modes of how students learn as: external learning from an authority through lectures and text books (quadrant A learning); internal learning through visualisation, insight, understanding of concepts, holistically and intuitively (quadrant D learning); 1 The authors would like to thank and express their gratitude to: Ned Herrmann and Ann Hermann-Nehdi of Herrmann International for their valuable contribution to the development of students full potential; The University of Pretoria for a research grant; Helene Coetzee for research assistance; The Criminology Class of 2000 who participated in the project; The Criminological Society of Southern Africa for allowing the authors to make use of information obtained from the Council reports. 119

2 interactive learning by means of discussions and hands-on sensory-based experiments where the learners try and fail and try again through encouragement and verbal feedback (quadrant C learning); and Herrmann Four Quadrant Whole Brain Model, however, quantifies a person's relative preference for thinking in four different modes that are based on the taskspecialised functioning of the physical brain (Herrmann 1995: 72, 350). procedural learning through methodical step-by-step testing of what is being taught, as well as through practise and repetition to improve skills (quadrant B learning). It is imperative for all educators to develop their students full potential by providing key learning opportunities as whole brain activities to whole brain learners for a whole brain world. THINKING STYLE PREFERENCES AND LEARNING STYLE MODELS Students arrive at tertiary institutions with thinking style preferences that have been established through schooling and life experiences. According to Herrmann (1996:34-35) mental preferences are not solely predetermined genetically, but result from a combination of nature (genetic inheritance) and nurture (parenting, teaching, life experiences and cultural influences). These existing preferences are influential with regard to all the cognitive activities in which students are engaged. A thinking style preference leads to a learning style preference and in turn determines a student s dominant cognitive mode in which he/she communicates and receives information. The notion of learning style and learning style models are well documented in research (Felder 1996). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) classifies students according to their preferences on scales derived from the psychologist Carl Jung's theory of psychological types. Students may be extroverts or introverts; sensors or intuitors; thinkers or feelers; and judges or perceivers. Kolb s Learning Style Model classifies students as having a preference for concrete experience, abstract conceptualisation, active experimentation, or reflective observation. The For the purpose of this project the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI), based on the Herrmann Four Quadrant Model, was used to determine the thinking style preferences of the students. THE HERRMANN FOUR QUADRANT WHOLE BRAIN MODEL AND THE HBDI Based on his extensive research on brain dominance, which spans 20 years, Herrmann (1995 &1996) developed an assessment tool that quantifies the degree of a person s preference for a specific thinking style the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI). It takes the form of a survey consisting of 120 questions to be completed by an individual. Although Herrmann discusses his model as a metaphor, the brain-based quadrant model is aligned with, and supported by, various research projects and is used as a measuring tool. It also points out that brain dominance is natural and normal for all humans beings. This means that brain dominance influences all four specialised thinking structures of the brain and not just the two hemispheres. The different modes (quadrants) are indicated in Figure 1. According to Herrmann (1995:79-85), preference for the A-quadrant (left cerebral mode) means that a person favours activities that involve logical, analytical and factual information combined with an ability to perceive, verbalise and express information precisely. A preference for the B-quadrant (left limbic mode) implies similarities to an A-quadrant thinking preference. In both cases a linear approach to activities is taken and ambiguity is rejected. Individuals with a B-quadrant preference favour organised, sequential, planned and detailed information. They are 120

3 conservative in their actions and like to keep things as they are. A preference for the C-quadrant (right limbic mode) indicates a preference for information that is interpersonal, involves emotion (based on feelings) and which is kinaesthetic. A preference for the D- quadrant (right cerebral mode) is mainly characterised by a holistic approach. GENERAL REMARKS ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE HBDI Through co-workers and independent researchers, as well as the Institute of Educational Testing Survey in the United States of America, Bunderson in Herrmann (1995:72; ) documented the Bundersons validity study of the HBDI (in Herrmann 1995: ). He concluded that the instrument provides a valid, reliable measure of human mental preferences when applied in a professional way, interpreted in conformity with the four quadrant model and scored by means of the approved scoring method. For South African users, the scoring is done at Herrmann International in the USA. The data of over one million individual surveys form the database of the Herrmann International headquarters in North Carolina (Lumsdaine, Lumsdaine & Shellnutt, 1999:52). In addition to the whole brain model illustrated in Figure 1, Herrmann (1995:220) developed a whole brain teaching and learning model based on his research. This model is illustrated in Figure 2. In this model the learning process is divided according to the four brain quadrants, and then further summarised into two categories: structured (left) and unstructured (right). In the structured (left mode) category we have what Herrmann refers to as hard processing dealing with logical, rational, critical and quantitative issues and activities. The procedural, planned, sequential, and organized elements of the learning process are also found in this mode (associated with the A- and B-quadrant thinking modes). All these stand in direct contrast to the unstructured (right mode) non-linear and non-verbal modalities of the right brain. The unstructured right mode represents visual, conceptual, and simultaneous processing, and soft processing involves emotional, expressive, and interpersonal activities (associated with the C- and D-quadrant thinking modes). Together, these comprise the full range of preferences for teaching and learning (Herrmann 1995:221). The model serves as a teaching and learning tool enabling educators to design and deliver content to students in ways that not only reach each learner by accommodating their learning preferences, but also address learning avoidance. Students should be made aware of the fact that in order to realize their full potential, they need to develop skills in all four thinking modes. In this manner students potential can be fully developed (Herrmann 1996:152). Educators should be aware of the fact that students with the same preferred thinking style will find it easier to communicate and understand each other, compared to students who have opposite preferences of thinking. It is also important to note that even though two people can have almost identical profiles, they will be different thinkers with differing abilities and competencies because of clustering that takes place within each dominant quadrant. RESEARCH PROJECT Aim of the project The aim of the research project was: to determine the preferred thinking styles of a group of first-year students studying a first course in Criminology; to determine the distribution of thinking style preferences of this group; and to introduce a practical whole brain teaching and learning model for lecturers of 121

4 Criminology. Methodology Qualitative research was undertaken and the study involved 68 students at the University of Pretoria who were all registered for a first course in Criminology. The students were introduced to the whole brain concept and emphasis was placed on the fact that the instrument was not a test that measured cognitive abilities. Students received their profiles as well as a document enabling them to interpret their own thinking preference. The data were entered into the HBDI scoring program and were transmitted by modem to the Herrmann International Group in North Carolina for scoring. The numerical results were returned by computer via the Internet and were manually entered on the profile data sheet by the researchers. For the purpose of this article the group is briefly discussed with regard to gender, language, and race. The main focus, however, is on the diversity pertaining to the students thinking style preferences. Diversity in gender, language and race In Table 1 the diversity with regard to gender, language and race is indicated for all the students. With regard to the gender of the 68 students in this study, 63,2 percent are females and 36,8 percent males. According to Table 1-54 percent use Afrikaans as mother tongue, 9 percent use English and 37 percent use an African/Ethnic language. The data clearly illustrate the existence of diversity with regard to gender, language and race amongst students enrolled for a first course in Criminology. DIVERSITY IN THINKING PREFERENCES OF STUDENTS WHO ENROLLED FOR A FIRST COURSE IN CRIMINOLOGY The thinking preferences of first-year students enrolled for a first course in Criminology at the University of Pretoria were assessed using the Hermann Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI). The scores and profiles reveal thinking preferences for four different ways of thinking and "knowing". Examples of individual student profiles The examples of the profiles displayed in Figure 3 are indicative of the diversity in the thinking style preferences of the students enrolled for a first course in Criminology. Individual profile showing an A-quadrant thinking preference The profile in Figure 3A displays a strong preference for the thinking modes of the A-quadrant as well as an overall tilt towards the thinking preferences associated with cerebral functions. This profile indicates a strong preference for the analytical, rational and logical processes of the upper left A-quadrant, and in contrast also shows a preference for the integrated, synthesizing, creative and holistic aspects of the upper right D-quadrant. The profile indicates a lower preference for the controlled, structured and organised thinking modes associated with the lower left B- quadrant but a non-preference for the kinesthetic thinking modes associated with the lower right C- quadrant. Individual profile showing a B-quadrant thinking preference The profile in Figure 3B displays a strong preference for the thinking modes associated with the B-quadrant as well as the C-quadrant indicating an overall tilt towards the thinking preferences in the limbic mode. This implies a strong preference for the controlled, structured, and organised thinking modes associated with the lower left B-quadrant as well as for the interpersonal, feeling-based thinking modes of the 122

5 lower right C-quadrant. The profile also shows a nonpreference for the analytical, rational and logical processes of the upper left A-quadrant and a nonpreference for the upper right D-quadrant which is associated with holistic thinking modes. Individual profile showing a C-quadrant thinking preference The profile in Figure 3C displays a strong preference for the thinking modes associated with the C-quadrant and the D-quadrant indicating an overall tilt towards the thinking styles in the right mode. This implies a strong preference for the interpersonal, feeling-based, emotional and spiritual thinking modes of the lower right C-quadrant, and also a strong preference for the holistic, imaginative, and conceptual thinking styles associated with the upper right, D-quadrant. This profile, however, reveals that there is almost an avoidance of the upper left A-quadrant thinking processes associated with logical, rational thought. The overall interpretation is that this individual shows a low preference for the left brain hemisphere thinking processes. Individual profile showing a D-quadrant thinking preference The profile in Figure 3D displays a very strong preference for the thinking modes associated with the D-quadrant as well as an overall tilt towards the thinking preferences of the right brain hemisphere. The thinking styles in this case are characterised by creative, holistic, and synthesising modes in combination with interpersonal, emotional, and spiritual processes. This profile also indicates a nonpreference for the thinking modes associated with the left brain hemisphere and that there is almost an avoidance of the A-quadrant thinking preferences associated with logical and rational thoughts. The composite profile for this group is displayed in Figure 4A while Figure 4B displays the dominance preference of the group in a single map. If the profiles of the group are superimposed, their composite profile indicates preferred modes of thinking in all four quadrants. This confirms the research findings of Knowles (1990:245) claiming that people are equally distributed throughout the teaching and learning model in terms of their mental preferences. In addition, the research findings of Herrmann (1996:47), namely that individual profiles represent a highly diverse, but well balanced, distribution of thinking style preferences with regard to the four quadrants of the Whole Brain Model are confirmed. Figure 5 the dominance map of the group is analysed. This map indicates the dominant preferences of the participants. The map reveals that the dominant characteristics of the group show a tilt towards the C- quadrant thinking modes, with a preference for the interpersonal, emotional and spiritual processes. From the dominance map it is further concluded that the group has a non-preference for the A- and the D- quadrant thinking modes. Thinking processes are associated with the logical, analytical, mathematical and problem solving modes of the A-quadrant as well as with the imaginative, artistic, holistic conceptualising and synthesising thinking modes of the D-quadrant. All these thinking skills are needed by employers in South Africa and should be addressed by tertiary education institutions if they want to be globally competitive and nationally relevant (Vice-Chancellor Prof J van Zyl UP Academic Opening ). HERRMANN S WHOLE BRAIN TEACHING AND LEARNING MODEL Based on his Whole Brain Teaching and Learning Model illustrated in Figure 2, Herrmann (1995:419) identified preferred learning activities within the quadrant model. These activities should be taken into account if educators want to teach effectively. Figure 2 gives a summary of these activities. FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS OF FOUR QUADRANT WHOLE BRAIN TEACHING AND LEARNING Results from this project reveal that a wide range of thinking preferences exists amongst students 123

6 following a first course in Criminology. The following aspects are of importance to educators of Criminology: The statement that every classroom represents a complete spectrum of thinking preferences is proven to be correct (Herrmann, 1996:151). This implies that curriculum designers and lecturers must be careful not to make unfounded assumptions about learners in the classroom. The project reveals that there is a distribution of learning preferences in all quadrants and that all modes are equally represented (Figure 4). Just as there is a distribution of thinking preferences across the spectrum of all four quadrants in the classroom, there is also a distribution of learning avoidance across the four quadrants (Figure 5). Learning avoidance is even more significant to facilitators of learning because according to Herrmann (1996:152) they turn people off and a turned off learner is a waste of educational time and effort. The greater the alignment between the thinking preference (teaching style) of the educator and the thinking preference (learning style) of the learner, the more competencies will be acquired by the learner. The greater the misalignment between the thinking preference of the educator and the thinking preference of the learner, the fewer competencies will be acquired by the learner. Data collected from several educational institutions show that there is no learning institution in South Africa with either a composite whole brain faculty or a whole brain curriculum. It is necessary to shift the focus away from traditional teaching methods since such methods are outdated within the context of whole brain teaching and learning (Lumsdaine & Lumsdaine 1995:96.). In order to develop the full potential of learners, whole brain learning should form the basis of teaching practices. This approach will assist all students to acquire skills over a wide spectrum and to develop and grow in areas of lesser preference by practising applicable mental processes in those modes. CHALLENGES FOR THE TEACHING OF CRIMINOLOGY In order to adapt existing teaching practices to the new paradigm it is necessary for lecturers to realise that they not only have to cope with and face the challenges posed by transformation but they also have to remain actively involved in the process. Rozenholtz (1989:24) suggests that this process for lecturers who seek to make changes in their teaching may involve various phases of thinking and behavioural experiences that could vary from confusion, doubt, stress, lost of control, redefinition of intent or purpose of teaching. Criminology lecturers may go through phases of trail and error but the process could also lead to clarity, enthusiasm and success. It should, however, be kept in mind these changes and the development of a new understanding of teaching and learning could not be achieved without sacrifices from individuals and/or cultures. Therefore lecturers should adopt a new attitude and perspective that could facilitate the process of change. Opportunities for development should be created not only for the Criminology students but also for the lecturers. Criminology lecturers should create and expand a coherent, critical approach to knowledge. The main focus should be to modify their beliefs regarding teaching and learning and to objectively evaluate the purpose of teaching in order to effect democratic student learning and social outcomes through education and institutional change. CONCLUSION The HBDI Metaphoric Model proved to be a valid and useful diagnostic assessment tool to determine the thinking preferences (learning styles) of students. The results obtained in this project correspond with the universal results of Herrmann s study (1996:151) that 124

7

8

9

10

11 BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, R. 1994: The limits of competence. Ballmoor, SRHE and Open University press. Bellis, I Competence: ideals, images and applications issues of definition, deprivation and implementation. Paper Bellis, I The process of change in vocational education and training: the South African experience. Paper presented at the Technicon Pretoria. p Bunderson, C V Appendix A The validity of the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument: In Herrmann. N The creative brain. 2 ed. U.S.A: Quebecor Printing Book group. De Boer, A & Steyn, T Thinking style preferences of underprepared first-year students in the Natural Science. South African Journal of Ethnology. 22 (3), Felder, R Matters of style. ASEE Prism, December: Gravett, S The Assessment of learning in higher education: guiding principles. South African Journal of Higher Education. 10 (1), Goodlad, J Educational renewal: better teachers, better schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Grundy, S Curriculum: product or praxis? London: Falmer press. London: Harper & Row. Kotzé, G S Assessment for an outcomes basedapproach. South African Journal of Education. 19 (1), Lumsdaine, M & Lumsdaine, E Thinking Preferences of Engineering Students: Implications for Curriculum Restructuring. Journal of Engineering Education. 84 (2) April: National Commission of Higher Education. (NCHE) A framework of Transformation. Olivier, C How to educate and train outcomes based. Pretoria: Van Schaik. Rosenholtz, S Teachers Workplace: the social organisation of schools. New York: Longman. Sutherland, L & Peckham, G A re-appraisal of assessment practices in the light of the South African Qualifications Authority. (SAQA) Act. South African Journal of Higher Education. 12 (2), Van Zyl, J Opening of the academic year : 1 February The University of Pretoria in a Global Context. / html. Venter, E Philosophy of education in a new South Africa. The South African Journal of Higher Education. 11 (1), Heard, D A developing model of teachers educating themselves for multicultural pedagogy. Higher Education, 38, Herrmann, N The creative brain. 2 ed. U.S.A.: Quebecor Printing Book group. Hermann, N Twenty years of thinking about the thinking brain. A special summary of learning outcomes. Herrmann International Unpublished data. Herrmann, N The whole brain business book. New York: Mc Graw Hill. Herrmann, N & Herrmann N A., Whole brain tools for today s training challenges. Unpublished document Herrmann International. Lake Lure. North Carolina. Kelly, A V Curriculum theory and practice. 129